Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.

I didn't think it possible that you could do something worse than your one sided political rants. Now reading your economic one, really convinces me, there must be something wrong with the water in texas!

First W, then you, then Perry...someone should check that water. Then build a water treatment plant, to remove the stupid from the water!

Holy Derp Batman, I think I have just read the most retarded thing on the web.

I agree that the post shows total lack of understanding of how to assess the market's performance.

Just a correction to my last post: I incorrectly wrote that today the market was approaching 12,000. The correct figure is 13,000. The percentage by which the Dow average has increased during the Obama administration was correctly calculated.

I was comparing apples to apples, using the figures from the first day in office and the last day in office for the last two presidents. Anyone who can use his/her brain should be able to figure out that the numbers for president Obama may still change since he is still in office, but his numbers are looking very good.

Perhaps I should calculate the numbers taking into account the lowest numbers reached by the Dow average to see how much of a recovery was accomplished during a president's administration. I suspect that the comparison will still show that Bush was a total failure compared with president Clinton, and president Obama will look a whole lot better than Bush.

If not a soul every views a single video I ever post, I beg of you all to view this one, even if its the first and last, I beg you to

It must really hurt when one totally loses all credibility, that not even begging will result in anyone else paying attention to the posts including links to videos or other paraphernalia. I am guessing that too many incidences of cutting and pasting unread articles forwarded by misterious puppeteers can have a deleterious effect on someone's reputation as a contributor on the debates in the forums.

For all we know those links may contain video clips unseen by the poster, the usual dis-information hoaxes, totally mis-understood information, or even worse, they may contain viruses that will subject our computers to cyber attacks.

You know, after a decade of blogging, one would think that I would have grown leather thick skin, but I just cant seem to..Humiliating and hurtful attacks such as these cant be dismissed just because its not done face to face. I doubt anyone would say such vicious things to another human whom they've never met..but hate does that..its like a poison or cancer even..my only motive here is to share news in current events and politics, or sometimes share my opinions (which is what forums were created for)While I'm never malicious towards any poster, because my world views are uncommon ans usually unpopular, this is what I must endure.Its just disheartening really.. so many posters in the past, posters I miss, even those whom I disagreed with, have been ran off or the few of us who refuse to be bullied out of here must endure this.Its just sad.

It is sad.....that you do the same thing to the president every damn day.

With fewer than nine months to go before Election Day, The Signal predicts that Barack Obama will win the presidential contest with 303 electoral votes to the Republican nominee's 235.

How do we know? We don't, of course. Campaigns and candidates evolve, and elections are dynamic events with more variables than can reasonably be distilled in an equation. But the data--based on a prediction engine created by Yahoo! scientists--suggest a second term is likely for the current president. This model does not use polls or prediction markets to directly gauge what voters are thinking. Instead, it forecasts the results of the Electoral College based on past elections, economic indicators, measures of state ideology, presidential approval ratings, incumbency, and a few other politically agnostic factors...

You know, after a decade of blogging, one would think that I would have grown leather thick skin, but I just cant seem to..Humiliating and hurtful attacks such as these cant be dismissed just because its not done face to face. I doubt anyone would say such vicious things to another human whom they've never met..but hate does that..

There was nothing personal in what I wrote, and I don't hate anyone.

Everything I wrote in my post is based on the experiences I have had in the discussions in the POF forums. I won't bore anyone listing all the details because I'm sure that the readers here are familiar with the facts. In my view, you need to re-gain some credibility by engaging in serious discussion in your posts. It entails recognizing when someone gives you correct information, or present reasonable argument to sustain your position.

For example, you are attacking president Obama's performance using the Dow numbers from the November 2008 election day:

Obama has lorded over the worst stock market performance in the history of America for a new president. Its an unprecedented 28% drop from Obama’s election to today.

The problem with that assertion is that you are trying to fudge the figures in order to assign blame to president Obama for the failures of the previous president. Bush was in charge while his friends were trying to cause as much damage as possible to the economy before president Obama would take office in January 2009.

To make things clearer for you: if you would like to give responsibility to president Obama for the November 2008 drop in the market on election day and the days after the election, then you would have to give credit to president Obama for restoring the market using the lowest figures reached in the days after the election and before January 20, 2009. Would that be fair enough for you?

You're wrong. Not once in a while, but constantly. You consistantly post crap thats poorly sourced, pulled from the most ridiculous of sites, which you tout as the be all end all of facts, only to be shown how incredibly wrong you are, which you return with a, "Whoops, my bad," or my favorite, "I was misled."

And when people call you on your rampart horse crap, you whinge about being "attacked".

Now, others my choose to be more circumspect in their criticism of you, but me, I favor the direct approach. I have a low tolerance for bullsh!t. If the mods don't like what I have to say, tough. Someone needs to call out your nonsense.

Accept it, you're our own little version of Orly Taitz, and not in a good way. I don't know what your personal issues are, and I don't care. You seem to have a boatload of them though. Maybe you should spend some time dealing with them instead of cruising the net and ranting about how Obama is a worse tyrant since Hitler.

Cuz you ain't got a frikkin clue.

The sad thing is, you'd probabaly be an interesting conversationalist, if you manage to drag your head out of the ether for a while.

Even more insidious, the event was awarded NO DOMESTIC MEDIA COVERAGE.

...and why should the media give a racism nut job media whore* the time of day?

Adam Kokesh...Kokesh, along with six other students, created controversy by putting up satirical political posters across the university campus. The posters featured a picture of a stereotypical Arab man and the headline "Hate Muslims? So do we!!!," with illustrative captions explaining that the typical Muslim is equipped with a venom-spouting mouth, laser-shooting eyes, and hidden AK-47:s, among other parodical features. The poster was signed "Students for Conservativo-Fascism Awareness," and encouraged students to visit the right-wing website terrorismawareness.org. Kokesh and the six other students publicly admitted to responsibility amidst accusations that the poster was Islamophobic, maintaining that their intent was to spread awareness of what they considered to be the overtly racist intentions of the above-mentioned website's "Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week" organized by a conservative student organization and featuring David Horowitz.

"if we are denied the peaceful change we demand, I promise you this: we're going to be doing this the hard way."

Now color me crazy, but that sounds a bit treasonous! I would take that as a threat against the president. Now if he is really in the armed forces, didn't he take an oath to protect and defend the constitution and the country? So he advocates a violent change of "his" demands are not met?

Gawd, I wonder where they grow people like this.

If Obama won the election clearly, then he is the legit president of the USA. If whoever the republican nominee is, and if Ron Paul runs as an independent, whoever wins the majority of the votes, is the president. No one, I mean NO ONE, has the right to seek change via violence.

Sorry, but I just had to Goodwin this thread. You've got one loony corporal and somebody here says that we're in danger of having a military coup if the nearly-as-loony Ron Paul isn't elected President. You've got a big military down there - odds are that a few of them are going wear tin foil hats under their helmets.

I think that Ron Paul should be questioned by the serious media about his ties to this loony toon and his comrades. There should be no place for politicians who aspire to lead this country to be fomenting sedition and acts of violence against elected government officials.

Any soldier who would even for a second entertain the idea that his/her vote should carry more weight than the vote of any other citizen is a traitor to this country.

Kokesh sounds like a prime candidate for section 8. Plus some posters are delusional- your country was on the verge of collapse when Obama came into office. He has done an ok job, given what he had to work with.The only thing more pathetic than Ron Paul are his supporters.

No one is attacking the military, they are merely pointing out, what he said was seditious. As for Ron Paul, well that's a whole nother kettle of fish. Let's look at the facts. His views on the gay issue, the racial rants in his news letter, whether he likes it or not, was published under his name and his banner. His view of how much he would shrink the government, so they would be in one building only in washington! hahaha!

He will NEVER attract the numbers to win, just based on that. His views are far too extreme to win the middle.

BUT let's suspend reality for a moment. If by some strange quirk of fate, he was elected president, and some random military guy(a corporal? really? 500 marching at his side?? really?) said the same thing that if they didn't get their way and they would "take the hard way", which implies by force, would you be OK with them tearing down the democracy?

You never addressed my post about yours, only the other one from another poster.

It has little to do with journalism, your point I mean. If anything the journalists have been way to kind to Ron Paul. That racial drivel posted in his news letter has never been explained, tried to be excused by a series of "the dog ate my homework" excuses, but never explained how a man would let that be published under his name.

Start buying bottled water, that stuff down there warps peoples minds, like I said in another post.

YOO HOO!!!! Sorry I don't bold my statements, perhaps that is why you keep missing them! I'm sure we could go onto name all the heros of our distinguished military. That still fails to address, how either a corporal in the military under Bush finds fault with the current president, or why this, Ron Paul, Corporal K., or the war which just ended by act of president shrub, under Obama, makes him a failure?

If the press, or mainstream media as all the right wing wackos care to refer to them, are not reporting on this story, it STILL has nothing to do with Obama, he does not control the media.

Now you can go onto to quote all the presidents, the war heros and the generals, admirals and whoever you wish. Rhetoric is always entertaining. It still has zippity-do-dah to do with Obama!

Ron Paul is not even a blip on the radar, that is why he gets little 'face time'. The claim that the majority of the armed forces support RP is completely unfounded. This is based on what? You tube videos and Facebook? Critical thought is a good thing.

(Yawn!!) I take issue with your numbers. Then again, I take issue with most published numbers!

To use an old saying, and equate Ron Paul's chances, "he couldn't get laid in a whorehouse with a fist full of fifties!"

Polls are designed for a'holes! There isn't a poll, that can't be fixed, simply by posing the question, in a certain way.

Simply put, the republican party, the only true alternative to the democrats, keeps alienating voters, hispanics on the immigration issue, people of color on the poor issue, labor on the auto bailout issue, women on the contraceptive issue and a host of others.

Worse than that by far, is the fact that the republicans themselves, are not happy with the current crop of candidates. Mitt the front runner, has yet to achieve 50% in any state. So they can look forward to a "who cares" turn out on election day! Admittedly republicans turn out better than democrats, but in this year, with the issues in such stark differences, republicans will lose turnout, democrats if only because the republicans hold such extreme views, will turn out to keep them out of th White House!